Gass Purchase - Pre-Printing Fold #11A

Hello to all,

Below is my one and only purchase at GASS. I spent several hours looking at material but unfortunately nothing caught my eye or when it did, my budget did not allow. I just had to get something so when this one crossed my view, it became mine for a small fee. I am working to collect the various recuts as as well as these type of pre-printing paper folds. Given the UR guide dot and the top row copy I thought I had a good chance to plate this one. Based on the guide dot placement (to me just at the top of line and at left edge of the right triangle), the closest I could find was 3L3. I would appreciate any feedback and I am sure I will learn something.


Thanks in advance,
Hobsun

Pre-printing paper folds are pretty crazy.

I have a 1c stamp on cover where the fold appears to have literally split the stamp into two halves.

The valuation on these is also kind of inconsistent, as if one is buying for the variety, it is good, but for the average collector, it can be viewed as a defect, and detracts.

Beautiful stamp. Are you going to clean it in peroxide, or leave it that way ?


Peter

Hi, Hobsun013,

That's a really cool example of a pre-printing crease!

It's hard to be absolutely certain from your image, but I'm almost certain that the position isn't 3L3. The right inner line on 3L3 runs into the upper-right triangle, but it doesn't appear to on your stamp.

I found a better candidate, but if you'd like to give it another try, I'll hold off on revealing it.

Fold vs crease.
I would call this a crease.

All,

As I suspected, I will learn from this one.

My intent is to leave it alone (no cleaning). I had not really considered a crease vs a fold but could be a crease. Is there something specific that I can look for to help confirm one way or the other. I do not see any ink within the "fold?" itself but that is not conclusive.

As for the plating, you are correct, I see the line extension as noted. I also was worried about the right frame line and top frame line which clearly join. In at least one example of the photos of L3L they seem not to meet but the other is not as clear.

After a brief look, L4L seems at least a bit closer. What I observe is that the right outer frame is a bit closer to the inner line and the left side has a bit more separation - which seems to align with my stamp. I also see a bit of an upward lift in the bottom frame line coming in from the left before it settles a bit as it moves across the stamp making the right gap being just a bit wider.

I may consider cleaning the stamp. That may also allow for a better analysis of crease vs fold. Open to any thoughts.

Many thanks as always.
Hobsun

Crease vs fold.

Linns had a related article on this topic with several photo examples that seem to align with my entry above. They labeled these as creases - which may be more appropriate. Not sure of the overall significance but it is likely of interest to a true specialist. I see these as nice additions to a collection and find them interesting but have limited them in my collection to this specific stamp.

https://www.linns.com/news/us-stamp...dern-stamps.

Hobsun

I agree this is a crease. It breaks the paper and then some.
I should have been more specific in my response.

Hi, Hobsun013,

If you meant to say 4L3, then you came up with the same position that I did!

Hmmm -- fold versus crease -- what is the conventional wisdom as to the defining difference -- broken paper fibers I presume?

I suppose that a "fold" (if on a used stamp anyway) -- could be soaked and pressed leaving not a single broken paper fiber after the fact. Alternatively, a "crease" with broken paper fibers is definitely a paper fault.

Either way -- in the case of Hobsun's stamp -- the "fold / crease" was in the paper prior to the press coming down -- probably because the paper was a little too wet when laid onto the plate by the pressman -- and is thus the result of the normal production process -- (versus some sort of after the fact occurrence that damaged the stamp). As an aside -- while the paper was likely too wet when placed onto the plate (causing the fold-over) -- the edges of the sheet tended to dry faster than the rest of the sheet -- resulting in the slightly dry paper impression most notable in the TLB of Hobsun's stamp.

Generally speaking, this is what I would call a pre-printing paper fold-over -- BUT -- somewhere along the way, a collector soaked the stamp and expanded the fold-over to expose the portion of the paper that did not get inked.

From the perspective of a specialist in the issue -- these types of printing varieties are highly collectible -- but I can also understand where a condition conscious collector would view this type of printing variety as a damaged stamp.

This is one of the things that makes stamp collecting so interesting and diverse -- one collectors junk is another's gem!

Hobsun -- aside from he sulphuretting that has already been mentioned (and is easily fixed with a brief dip in H2O2 -- followed by a soak in distilled H2O) your stamp is a very nice example of a pre-printing paper fold over! Thanks for showing it.

Regards to All // ioagoa

Regardless of whether it's a "crease" or a "fold", it occurred prior to printing vs. simply a damaged after the fact. Therefore it's still of interest IMO.

P.S. Isn't a the paper preprint fold inherently creased, just numerous creases in opposite directions?

Seems to me to be a distinction in search of a reason...

Classic Coins - yes 4L3 was my choice. Not sure what happened with my typo. Not even close. Now that I have the proper plating info, I can record and mount this alongside my other examples. For now, I will not clean it.

Ioagoa / Revenue Collector - thanks for feedback, I agree that this was pre-printing in terms of the crease/fold (not after the fact).

Bottom line I consider this a nice addition and I learned something as usual. All for small fee and with my thanks to all who replied.

Hobsun

I can't imagine why any collector would consider this a "damaged" stamp. It's a very nice printing variety.

These are always called a pre-printing paper fold. I've never seen pre=printing paper crease.

Agree with eyeonwall, this is definitely a pre-printing paper fold.
The oval between "W" of NEW and "-" is disjointed.
A collector might have "flattened out" the stamp so we simply cannot see the two folds (at least not in the image).